memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Memory Alpha:Pages for deletion/Subject biased episode lists
This is a page to discuss the suggestion to delete " ". *If you are suggesting a page for deletion, add your initial rationale to the section "Deletion rationale". *If you want to discuss this suggestion, add comments to the section "Discussion". *If a consensus has been reached, an administrator will explain the final decision in the section "Admin resolution". In all cases, please make sure to read and understand the deletion policy before editing this page. Deletion rationale We have categories to categorize pages by subject matter, if desired, which can be suggested at MA:CS. This is just a judgement call by one editor that an episode is about a certain subject and not something that is cited as a specific topic. We've deleted other pages like "Ferengi episode" (Discussion here) before. 31dot (talk) 08:43, September 8, 2017 (UTC) Added Courtroom drama episodes. 31dot (talk) 08:46, September 8, 2017 (UTC) Added Quest for immortality episodes. --NewChanterelle (talk) 03:18, September 15, 2017 (UTC) Added Man against nature episodes. Apologies, I created this page by accident. --NewChanterelle (talk) 21:39, October 5, 2017 (UTC) I've added Time travel episodes, Alternate timeline episodes, and Parallel universe episodes.. - 06:28, October 12, 2017 (UTC) Discussion-A * I think we should keep courtroom drama episodes but delete physical disability episodes. Imho, what's classed as a courtroom drama episode is much more quantifiable than physical disability episodes (the latter being highly subjective and would include virtually all of TNG, due to the presence of Geordi La Forge). Also, I would think we might want to keep the article "Ferengi episodes" if we treated it the same way as bottle show, with citations for every single example (I'm thinking it might be interesting to find out how Ira Steven Behr and other members of the production staff used the term). Also, there are lots of terms, like "hearing", "trial", "court", "tribunal", etc. which could identify episodes listed in the courtroom drama episodes article but which would otherwise not be so easy to display so neatly (if you know what I mean). Having said that, I wouldn't be adverse to it becoming a category instead, as has been suggested. --Defiant (talk) 08:59, September 8, 2017 (UTC) :Regarding "Ferengi episode", I suppose we could initially create it at as a subsection of the bginfo in the Ferengi article and see if there's enough info there for it to serve as its own page, although the Ferengi article itself is already getting a bit too big. --Defiant (talk) 09:03, September 8, 2017 (UTC) ::My rationale for creating these pages can be found in the Episode categorization project description. I'm new on the wiki and still learning the ropes. But I cite pages such as Time travel episodes as precedent for the pages that were deleted. I read the deletion rationale for the Ferengi episodes page, but I propose the situation is different here. In particular, deciding which episodes count as courtroom dramas is just as objective an exercise as deciding which episodes involve time travel. By contrast, choosing which episodes are about Ferengi is comparatively vague and subjective. To sum up: If there is going to be a page for time travel episodes, then I don't see what reason prevents a page for, say, courtroom drama episodes. --NewChanterelle :::If we kept something about court or hearing related episodes then the "drama" part should be removed from the name. With "bottle show" there are at least sources to cite that various episodes were bottle shows. The same isn't necessarily true when categorizing pages by subject matter(especially ones that involve a judgement call like disabilities); which is another reason categories are more appropriate for such an enterprise(pardon the pun). 31dot (talk) 10:01, September 8, 2017 (UTC) :Lol. Yeah, no problem about renaming the page "courtroom episodes" --Defiant (talk) 10:50, September 8, 2017 (UTC) ::FYI I also created the page Quest for immortality episodes that I think warrants discussion in this discussion thread. ~~~~ (I (NewChanterelle) am having trouble signing off, as you can see. Can any one point me to a place on the wiki that explains how to do this? I believe I correctly followed the instructions on Memory Alpha:Editing FAQ.) ::Just for the record, I wonder if we still might find a way to define physical disability so as to be able to keep the corresponding page. I posed this relevant question on Science Fiction and Fantasy Stack Exchange to give a sense of what I have in mind. --User:NewChanterelle :Just goes to show how hugely subjective that category is and, therefore, non-encyclopedic. I believe both the "physical disability" and "quest for immortality" pages definitely need to be delete'd. --Defiant (talk) 04:09, September 11, 2017 (UTC) ::I understand your what you mean. But let me push back a bit by noting that the Simpsons Fandom wiki made a nice collection of Episode theme pages . I think the same should be possible on Memory Alpha with a little common sense consensus making on the theme definitions. --User:NewChanterelle :Sorry, but this community isn't interested in that. The Simpsons Wiki is an entirely different project. --Defiant (talk) 07:32, September 11, 2017 (UTC) :Come to think of it, some of those categories would indeed be fine, probably, as the ones like "Episodes that have been banned" and "Halloween-themed episodes" (using citations, in much the same way as "Ferengi episode" and "bottle show"), etc. are more quantifiable and require less subjective opinion from MA users than something like "quest for immortality episodes". Only problem is, I'm not sure if there's enough of either kind of episode to necessitate a category. comes to mind for Halloween episodes, but I'm not sure if there's any others. --Defiant (talk) 08:28, September 11, 2017 (UTC) :I've recently revised my opinion on "Courtroom episodes", as I now think ''all pages of this type need to have citations for every single episode listed. I don't believe "courtroom drama episode", "courtroom episode" or even "courtroom show" is a phrase commonly used by the production staff (unlike, say, "bottle show"), so I now think we should '''delete both that page and the others. In fact, I think this entire project should be deleted too. We should then restart the project for pages that have numerous citations from production staff members. --Defiant (talk) 05:48, September 13, 2017 (UTC) ::I have no objections to your proposal. --NewChanterelle (talk) 07:06, September 13, 2017 (UTC) :::That makes sense to me as well. 31dot (talk) 10:58, September 13, 2017 (UTC) ::::Seems logical. BTW, if you want to keep making these un-cited lists on your personal page, I suppose you could. --LauraCC (talk) 20:42, September 14, 2017 (UTC) :Why that strikes me as an appealing suggestion. Actually, my primary motivation for having proposed this user project stems from a need on my part for curated lists of similar Star Trek episodes/films for an academic research project. I think any further elaboration about the research objectives would go beyond the scope of this discussion thread. But if you don't mind, I will post on your talk page to ask your advice about the appropriateness of compiling such lists on my personal page, seeing as you showed some initial interest in my proposed user project. That said, I don't mean to single you out. Everyone's input is more than welcome. --NewChanterelle (talk) 03:08, September 15, 2017 (UTC) :::::I don't think there's any suggestion that these lists you're compiling aren't interesting and neat; instead everything boild down to how/if they can be integrated with what we're trying to do at this particular project. -- Capricorn (talk) 01:24, September 17, 2017 (UTC) :Thanks, I appreciate the encouragement. And I concur wholeheartedly with your assessment of the situation. IMHO that's a good way to sum things up. --NewChanterelle (talk) 01:34, September 17, 2017 (UTC) Discussion-B everyone, this is hard enough to follow without people's position being consistently in bold, to say nothing about how no one ever seems to be able to use the bulletpoints right once an actual discussion starts. Should probably just stop requiring those altogether. I've added in the other pages of this type mainly to suggest they be merged into their appropriate in universe articles. This could be done by simply placing the info in the appendices, or they could be reworked to change the POV; Time travel episodes at least has info that could easily be reworked, if not the other two I've also added. The other option I see is that all of these could be merged together to form a meta topic page, much like how Depicting Klingons covers the evolution of the Klingons as both changes in makeup and storytelling. Either way, I don't think any of these pages should stay the way they are now. - 06:28, October 12, 2017 (UTC) * Merge, they are essentially the "appearances" section of their namesake articles. They are mostly just rehashes of the page they represent. --Alan del Beccio (talk) 17:07, December 12, 2017 (UTC) *'Merge'. I support the idea and the comment mentioned in the lines above. Tom (talk) 11:06, January 1, 2018 (UTC) Admin resolution *Pages created by NewChanterelle merged into his personal subpages, the pages that inspired those remain in question. - 22:16, December 10, 2017 (UTC) *Remaining pages merged. - 09:47, April 3, 2018 (UTC)